Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #120154 > unrolled thread
| Started by | jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2024-09-21 15:43 -0400 |
| Last post | 2024-09-25 15:23 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 258 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-21 15:43 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 08:06 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 10:45 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 08:59 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 11:03 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 09:08 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 11:51 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 15:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 17:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 07:39 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 10:54 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 09:32 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 11:45 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 13:56 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 14:03 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-09-23 15:48 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 17:52 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2024-09-23 15:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 17:53 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 07:20 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 09:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 08:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 11:17 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 11:46 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 10:52 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 12:54 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 10:59 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:05 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 11:07 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 13:51 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 15:56 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 15:43 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 17:48 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 07:19 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 11:30 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 09:49 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 08:24 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 11:32 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 11:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:30 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:43 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:50 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:22 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:12 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:35 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 19:19 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 07:36 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 11:36 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 13:11 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 13:31 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 13:52 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 14:06 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:22 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 11:12 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 14:30 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:38 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:01 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:40 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:23 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 14:38 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 13:45 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:36 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:39 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:04 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 17:14 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 16:23 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:18 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 17:26 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 21:24 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 20:37 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 13:49 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:03 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:38 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 15:17 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 15:49 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 14:52 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 12:55 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:08 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:24 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:28 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:36 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:44 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 14:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 16:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:32 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 17:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:49 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 17:53 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 07:34 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 10:20 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:46 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:51 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 11:20 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 19:17 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 19:27 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 13:32 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-26 12:23 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 11:25 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 19:20 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 10:03 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 13:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 14:09 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-27 02:27 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-27 11:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-27 16:14 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-27 15:25 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-27 18:24 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-28 09:12 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-28 17:33 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-28 15:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-29 13:41 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-29 13:48 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-29 14:49 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-29 11:23 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.com - 2024-09-30 07:26 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 07:40 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 12:24 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 15:47 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-30 17:58 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 10:57 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-30 05:29 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-30 14:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 15:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 16:00 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-09-30 16:09 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-30 19:43 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 07:31 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 11:01 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 10:06 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 09:58 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 12:58 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 16:14 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 19:43 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-02 07:11 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-02 09:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 09:57 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-30 10:18 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 07:32 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-30 19:51 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 07:36 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 10:00 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-01 10:42 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 12:53 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 10:02 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 13:11 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 16:13 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-01 21:50 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-01 20:06 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts User <noreply@user.com> - 2024-10-02 05:47 +0100
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-04 06:52 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-04 13:57 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-02 13:02 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-04 06:57 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-06 14:19 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-06 14:22 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-07 09:11 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-07 22:53 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-08 18:11 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-08 22:48 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 00:12 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-09 01:06 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 08:25 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-09 08:28 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 10:26 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-09 09:31 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-09 13:58 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 14:39 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-09 19:59 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-10-09 22:37 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-10 11:47 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-11 04:58 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-10-11 16:03 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-12 07:41 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-12 08:18 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-10-11 03:57 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-07 19:19 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-02 07:13 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-01 13:06 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 10:01 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-10-01 13:08 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 16:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 19:44 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@DastartdlyHQ.org - 2024-10-01 09:56 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 13:01 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-29 15:00 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-29 14:37 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-29 15:42 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-29 15:47 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2024-09-28 04:28 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-28 13:55 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 15:33 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2024-09-25 17:16 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 16:22 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-25 13:34 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 17:27 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-09-25 22:37 +0300
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 07:38 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 10:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 10:03 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 13:29 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-26 14:09 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-26 16:17 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 15:07 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-26 18:22 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-25 14:58 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-25 15:19 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:55 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 10:50 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 12:53 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-22 07:58 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 14:10 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 11:08 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 17:21 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-22 15:21 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 17:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 07:40 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 10:55 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 09:33 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 11:46 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 13:59 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:02 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-23 14:05 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:10 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 12:55 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 16:24 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 14:43 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 18:59 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:06 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:10 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-24 09:15 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 07:23 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 09:34 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2024-09-24 08:14 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 11:18 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-24 08:59 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 15:02 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 13:37 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Jack <noreply@mandrill.com> - 2024-09-23 00:15 +0000
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 08:48 +0800
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-09-22 11:46 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-22 13:35 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-22 11:43 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-22 17:00 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-22 14:50 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-23 10:32 -0400
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-23 16:55 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2024-09-23 08:11 -0700
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-09-24 08:24 +0200
Re: C++ named requirements as concepts jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> - 2024-09-25 15:23 -0400
Page 1 of 13 [1] 2 3 … 13 Next page →
| From | jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-21 15:43 -0400 |
| Subject | C++ named requirements as concepts |
| Message-ID | <vcn7kn$1n3bh$2@dont-email.me> |
Trying to come up to speed on C++ concepts. If they're are useful
why wouldn't they define named requirements as a concept, e.g.
template<typename T>
concept BasicLockable = requires(T a)
{
{ a.lock() } -> std::same_as<void>;
{ a.unlock() } -> std::same_as<void>;
};
template<BasicLockable T>
...
Also if I define some concept for use in function templates,
C++ doesn't like using primative types, just classes.
Regular templates don't have the problem but they
just seem to be glorified macros.
Joe Seigh
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 08:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcoj72$24s5j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120154 |
On Sat, 21 Sep 2024 15:43:19 -0400 jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> boringly babbled: >Trying to come up to speed on C++ concepts. If they're are useful >why wouldn't they define named requirements as a concept, e.g. The signal to noise ratio of useful vs pointless features in recent versions of C++ is not very good. All they're achieving is making the language so bloody complicated that new devs take one look at irt and flee for the hills. There's a reason Python - and to a lesser extent these days - Java are used for teaching in univerisities now, not C++. And if you don't get them young you can pretty much forget about getting many of the when they're older.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 10:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcole8$257gb$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120162 |
Am 22.09.2024 um 10:06 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > On Sat, 21 Sep 2024 15:43:19 -0400 > jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> boringly babbled: >> Trying to come up to speed on C++ concepts. If they're are useful >> why wouldn't they define named requirements as a concept, e.g. > > The signal to noise ratio of useful vs pointless features in recent versions > of C++ is not very good. All they're achieving is making the language so > bloody complicated that new devs take one look at irt and flee for the hills. Concepts are a very easy to understand feature of C++20.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 08:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcom9t$25au8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120163 |
On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 10:45:01 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >Am 22.09.2024 um 10:06 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >> On Sat, 21 Sep 2024 15:43:19 -0400 >> jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> boringly babbled: >>> Trying to come up to speed on C++ concepts. If they're are useful >>> why wouldn't they define named requirements as a concept, e.g. >> >> The signal to noise ratio of useful vs pointless features in recent versions >> of C++ is not very good. All they're achieving is making the language so >> bloody complicated that new devs take one look at irt and flee for the hills. > > >Concepts are a very easy to understand feature of C++20. They're also yet another solution looking for a problem that add another dollop of slop to the syntatic and semantic soup that is modern C++.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 11:03 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcomgh$25c0d$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120165 |
Am 22.09.2024 um 10:59 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 10:45:01 +0200 > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >> Am 22.09.2024 um 10:06 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >>> On Sat, 21 Sep 2024 15:43:19 -0400 >>> jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> boringly babbled: >>>> Trying to come up to speed on C++ concepts. If they're are useful >>>> why wouldn't they define named requirements as a concept, e.g. >>> >>> The signal to noise ratio of useful vs pointless features in recent versions >>> of C++ is not very good. All they're achieving is making the language so >>> bloody complicated that new devs take one look at irt and flee for the hills. >> >> >> Concepts are a very easy to understand feature of C++20. > > They're also yet another solution looking for a problem that add another > dollop of slop to the syntatic and semantic soup that is modern C++. > Without concepts you might have complex errors from inside of a generic functions. With human readable concept errors which all current C++20 -compilers support you get easier to read errors which show you which requirement a generic type missed. That's a real advance over C++17.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 09:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcompg$25dbp$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120167 |
On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:03:18 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >Am 22.09.2024 um 10:59 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >> On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 10:45:01 +0200 >> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >>> Am 22.09.2024 um 10:06 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >>>> On Sat, 21 Sep 2024 15:43:19 -0400 >>>> jseigh <jseigh_es00@xemaps.com> boringly babbled: >>>>> Trying to come up to speed on C++ concepts. If they're are useful >>>>> why wouldn't they define named requirements as a concept, e.g. >>>> >>>> The signal to noise ratio of useful vs pointless features in recent >versions >>>> of C++ is not very good. All they're achieving is making the language so >>>> bloody complicated that new devs take one look at irt and flee for the >hills. >>> >>> >>> Concepts are a very easy to understand feature of C++20. >> >> They're also yet another solution looking for a problem that add another >> dollop of slop to the syntatic and semantic soup that is modern C++. >> > >Without concepts you might have complex errors from inside of a generic >functions. With human readable concept errors which all current C++20 >-compilers support you get easier to read errors which show you which >requirement a generic type missed. That's a real advance over C++17. Generating appropriate readable errors is a function of the compiler, not the language. g++ errors can be absolutely useless for actual debugging and thats a fault of the gcc devs. Clang errors are usually more helpful but even they can be too long winded at times. Why the compiler devs thought printing out literally (in some cases) pages of incomprehensible gibberish just because of some minor templating error was a good idea beats me.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 11:51 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcopap$25o7r$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120168 |
Am 22.09.2024 um 11:08 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:03:18 +0200 >> Without concepts you might have complex errors from inside of a generic >> functions. With human readable concept errors which all current C++20 >> -compilers support you get easier to read errors which show you which >> requirement a generic type missed. That's a real advance over C++17. > Generating appropriate readable errors is a function of the compiler, not > the language. ... It's part of the language and therefore there are concepts. > g++ errors can be absolutely useless for actual debugging and thats a > fault of the gcc devs. Clang errors are usually more helpful but even > they can be too long winded at times. > Why the compiler devs thought printing out literally (in some cases) pages of > incomprehensible gibberish just because of some minor templating error was a > good idea beats me. Chose Java if you're overburdened with C++.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 15:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcpcap$28h9a$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120171 |
On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:51:25 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >Am 22.09.2024 um 11:08 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > >> On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:03:18 +0200 > >>> Without concepts you might have complex errors from inside of a generic >>> functions. With human readable concept errors which all current C++20 >>> -compilers support you get easier to read errors which show you which >>> requirement a generic type missed. That's a real advance over C++17. > >> Generating appropriate readable errors is a function of the compiler, not >> the language. ... > >It's part of the language and therefore there are concepts. Congrats on not understanding what I was saying. It wasn't that complicated. >> incomprehensible gibberish just because of some minor templating error was a >> good idea beats me. > >Chose Java if you're overburdened with C++. Its too late in my career to change now as I don't fancy starting at the bottom again, but if I was just starting out on a systems programming career right now I'd be learning Rust.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-22 17:33 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcpdb9$28log$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120181 |
Am 22.09.2024 um 17:15 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:51:25 +0200 > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >> Am 22.09.2024 um 11:08 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >> >>> On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:03:18 +0200 >> >>>> Without concepts you might have complex errors from inside of a generic >>>> functions. With human readable concept errors which all current C++20 >>>> -compilers support you get easier to read errors which show you which >>>> requirement a generic type missed. That's a real advance over C++17. >> >>> Generating appropriate readable errors is a function of the compiler, not >>> the language. ... >> >> It's part of the language and therefore there are concepts. > > Congrats on not understanding what I was saying. It wasn't that complicated. If you have requirements on a generic type and they're not fulfilled concepts are the only way to handle this conveniently in C++. > >>> incomprehensible gibberish just because of some minor templating error was a >>> good idea beats me. >> >> Chose Java if you're overburdened with C++. > > Its too late in my career to change now as I don't fancy starting at the > bottom again, but if I was just starting out on a systems programming career > right now I'd be learning Rust. > Rust will be popular in 10 - 20 years.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 07:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcr5vr$2keae$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120188 |
On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 17:33:03 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >Am 22.09.2024 um 17:15 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >> Congrats on not understanding what I was saying. It wasn't that complicated. > >If you have requirements on a generic type and they're not fulfilled >concepts are the only way to handle this conveniently in C++. Face <- palm. >> Its too late in my career to change now as I don't fancy starting at the >> bottom again, but if I was just starting out on a systems programming career >> right now I'd be learning Rust. >> > >Rust will be popular in 10 - 20 years. Or maybe it'll fail altogether like D. However it seems a reasonable halfway house between C and C++ with built in memory safety and much less of the syntatic and semantic bollocks that comes with C++.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 10:54 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcracf$2l831$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120201 |
Am 23.09.2024 um 09:39 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > Face <- palm. Seems you don't undestand concepts. >> Rust will be popular in 10 - 20 years. > Or maybe it'll fail altogether like D. However it seems a reasonable halfway > house between C and C++ with built in memory safety and much less of the > syntatic and semantic bollocks that comes with C++. The memory-safety can be reached while debugging through iterator-debug- ging. I consequently use iterator debugging, f.e. through spans on raw memory, and this way out of bounds errors are easy to find. Even for s.o. who doesn't know the code.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 09:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcrciv$2ljsb$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120203 |
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 10:54:44 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >Am 23.09.2024 um 09:39 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > >> Face <- palm. > >Seems you don't undestand concepts. And you don't understand english well enough to follow a thread which is fair enough, its probably not your first language.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 11:45 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcrdb6$2ln7i$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120206 |
Am 23.09.2024 um 11:32 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 10:54:44 +0200 > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >> Am 23.09.2024 um 09:39 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >> >>> Face <- palm. >> >> Seems you don't undestand concepts. > > And you don't understand english well enough to follow a thread which is > fair enough, its probably not your first language. Without concepts you've to deal with the implementation of code where you like to deal only with the interface.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 13:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcrs2q$2o19k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120208 |
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:45:15 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >Am 23.09.2024 um 11:32 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >> On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 10:54:44 +0200 >> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >>> Am 23.09.2024 um 09:39 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >>> >>>> Face <- palm. >>> >>> Seems you don't undestand concepts. >> >> And you don't understand english well enough to follow a thread which is >> fair enough, its probably not your first language. > >Without concepts you've to deal with the implementation >of code where you like to deal only with the interface. Stop digging.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 16:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcrs98$2o1dm$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120213 |
Am 23.09.2024 um 15:56 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:45:15 +0200 > Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >> Am 23.09.2024 um 11:32 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >>> On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 10:54:44 +0200 >>> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >>>> Am 23.09.2024 um 09:39 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >>>> >>>>> Face <- palm. >>>> >>>> Seems you don't undestand concepts. >>> >>> And you don't understand english well enough to follow a thread which is >>> fair enough, its probably not your first language. >> >> Without concepts you've to deal with the implementation >> of code where you like to deal only with the interface. > > Stop digging. > C++ is a programming language for people who work with it continuously, rather than occasionally.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Muttley@dastardlyhq.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 14:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vcrsf1$2o3e4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #120215 |
On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 16:00:13 +0200 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >Am 23.09.2024 um 15:56 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >> On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 11:45:15 +0200 >> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >>> Am 23.09.2024 um 11:32 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >>>> On Mon, 23 Sep 2024 10:54:44 +0200 >>>> Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> boringly babbled: >>>>> Am 23.09.2024 um 09:39 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: >>>>> >>>>>> Face <- palm. >>>>> >>>>> Seems you don't undestand concepts. >>>> >>>> And you don't understand english well enough to follow a thread which is >>>> fair enough, its probably not your first language. >>> >>> Without concepts you've to deal with the implementation >>> of code where you like to deal only with the interface. >> >> Stop digging. >> > >C++ is a programming language for people who work with it continuously, >rather than occasionally. Stop digging.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 15:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <A5gIO.23611$5837.11764@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #120203 |
Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> writes: >Am 23.09.2024 um 09:39 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com: > >> Face <- palm. > >Seems you don't undestand concepts. > >>> Rust will be popular in 10 - 20 years. > >> Or maybe it'll fail altogether like D. However it seems a reasonable halfway >> house between C and C++ with built in memory safety and much less of the >> syntatic and semantic bollocks that comes with C++. > >The memory-safety can be reached while debugging through iterator-debug- >ging. I consequently use iterator debugging, f.e. through spans on raw >memory, and this way out of bounds errors are easy to find. Even for >s.o. who doesn't know the code. All you seem to develop are 100-line programs. Try your techniques with a real-world application (half-million lines) and get back to us.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 17:52 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcs2r5$2p394$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120226 |
Am 23.09.2024 um 17:48 schrieb Scott Lurndal: > All you seem to develop are 100-line programs. Try your techniques > with a real-world application (half-million lines) and get back to > us. I use raw pointers, but where I would calculate by them on linear memory I use span and then I calculate with the iterators. Before span I used my own span-like class.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 15:47 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u4gIO.23610$5837.890@fx35.iad> |
| In reply to | #120201 |
Muttley@dastardlyhq.com writes: >>Rust will be popular in 10 - 20 years. > >Or maybe it'll fail altogether like D. However it seems a reasonable halfway >house between C and C++ with built in memory safety and much less of the >syntatic and semantic bollocks that comes with C++. So far. But then C++ didn't have all the syntactic and semantic bollocks when it was first developed; just C with classes for data encapsulation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2024-09-23 17:53 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <vcs2te$2p394$2@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #120225 |
Am 23.09.2024 um 17:47 schrieb Scott Lurndal: > So far. But then C++ didn't have all the syntactic and semantic bollocks > when it was first developed; just C with classes for data encapsulation. Most of this abstraction with newer language features makes sense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 13 [1] 2 3 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web